Locked-in sufferer Tony Nicklinson loses right-to-die High Court bid

Locked-in syndrome sufferer Tony Nicklinson has lost his High Court battle for the right to end his life with medical help.

A 47-year-old man with the same syndrome, who cannot be named for legal reasons and was referred to as Martin, also lost his legal challenge over the ban on assisted dying.

Tony Nicklinson is only able to communicate via a computer triggered by blinking and head movements (Picture: PA)

Lord Justice Toulson, Mr Justice Royce and Mrs Justice Macur at the High Court said the facts of the cases were ‘deeply moving and tragic’ and acknowledged the ‘terrible predicament’ the men found themselves in.

But they concluded that the court could not depart from the long-established legal position that ‘voluntary euthanasia is murder, however understandable the motives may be’.

In their judgment they said it was for Parliament to decide on changes to the law, not the courts, and that any changes would need the ‘most carefully structured safeguards which only Parliament can deliver’.

Mr Nicklinson, who has described his life as ‘pure torture’ after a catastrophic stroke during a business trip to Athens in 2005 left him paralysed below the neck and unable to speak, wept on live TV when he learned of the decision.

The 58-year-old, a father of two, is only able to communicate via a computer triggered by blinking or head movements.

‘It’s not the result I was hoping for but it isn’t entirely unexpected,’ Mr Nicklinson said in a statement released via his Twitter page.

‘Judges, like politicians, are happiest when they can avoid confronting the real issues and this judgment is not an exception to the rule. I believe the legal team acting on my behalf is prepared to go all the way with this but unfortunately for me it means yet another period of physical discomfort, misery and mental anguish while we find out who controls my life – me or the state.’

Lawyers for Mr Nicklinson, from Melksham, Wiltshire, said he has been reduced to a ‘dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable’ existence and that doctors should be permitted to lawfully end his life without fear of prosecution.

Paul Bowen QC, representing Mr Nicklinson, said: ‘Tony has now had almost seven years to contemplate his situation. With the continuing benefits of 21st-century health and social care, his life expectancy can be expected to be normal: another 20 years or more. He does not wish to live that life.’

David Perry QC, for the Ministry of Justice, said Mr Nicklinson’s ‘tragic and very distressing circumstances evoke the deepest sympathy’.

But he said: ‘Notwithstanding the distressing facts of his situation, the defendant submits that the claim for declarations is untenable. The law is well established.’

Mr Perry added there is ‘no defence of necessity to a charge of murder or assisted suicide if a doctor were to terminate, or assist in the termination of, the claimant’s life’.